Fas Signalling Promotes Intercellular Communication in T Cells

Cell-to-cell communication is a fundamental process for development and maintenance of multicellular organisms. Diverse mechanisms for the exchange of molecular information between cells have been documented, such as the exchange of membrane fragments (trogocytosis), formation of tunneling nanotubes (TNTs) and release of microvesicles (MVs). In this study we assign to Fas signalling a pivotal role for intercellular communication in CD4+ T cells. Binding of membrane-bound FasL to Fas expressing target cells triggers a well-characterized pro-apoptotic signalling cascade. However, our results, pairing up flow cytometric studies with confocal microscopy data, highlight a new social dimension for Fas/FasL interactions between CD4+ T cells. Indeed, FasL enhances the formation of cell conjugates (8 fold of increase) in an early time-frame of stimulation (30 min), and this phenomenon appears to be a crucial step to prime intercellular communication. Our findings show that this communication mainly proceeds along a cytosolic material exchange (ratio of exchange >10, calculated as ratio of stimulated cells signal divided by that recorded in control cells) via TNTs and MVs release. In particular, inhibition of TNTs genesis by pharmacological agents (Latruculin A and Nocodazole) markedly reduced this exchange (inhibition percentage: >40% and >50% respectively), suggesting a key role for TNTs in CD4+ T cells communication. Although MVs are present in supernatants from PHA-activated T cells, Fas treatment also leads to a significant increase in the amount of released MVs. In fact, the co-culture performed between MVs and untreated cells highlights a higher presence of MVs in the medium (1.4 fold of increase) and a significant MVs uptake (6 fold of increase) by untreated T lymphocytes. We conclude that Fas signalling induces intercellular communication in CD4+ T cells by different mechanisms that seem to start concomitantly with the main pathway (programmed cell death) promoted by FasL

Environmental Influences on Mate Preferences as Assessed by a Scenario Manipulation Experiment

Many evolutionary psychology studies have addressed the topic of mate preferences, focusing particularly on gender and cultural differences. However, the extent to which situational and environmental variables might affect mate preferences has been comparatively neglected. We tested 288 participants in order to investigate the perceived relative importance of six traits of an ideal partner (wealth, dominance, intelligence, height, kindness, attractiveness) under four different hypothetical scenarios (status quo/nowadays, violence/post-nuclear, poverty/resource exhaustion, prosperity/global well-being). An equal number of participants (36 women, 36 men) was allotted to each scenario; each was asked to allocate 120 points across the six traits according to their perceived value. Overall, intelligence was the trait to which participants assigned most importance, followed by kindness and attractiveness, and then by wealth, dominance and height. Men appraised attractiveness as more valuable than women. Scenario strongly influenced the relative importance attributed to traits, the main finding being that wealth and dominance were more valued in the poverty and post-nuclear scenarios, respectively, compared to the other scenarios. Scenario manipulation generally had similar effects in both sexes, but women appeared particularly prone to trade off other traits for dominance in the violence scenario, and men particularly prone to trade off other traits for wealth in the poverty scenario. Our results are in line with other correlational studies of situational variables and mate preferences, and represent strong evidence of a causal relationship of environmental factors on specific mate preferences, corroborating the notion of an evolved plasticity to current ecological conditions. A control experiment seems to suggest that our scenarios can be considered as realistic descriptions of the intended ecological conditions

Environmental Influences on Mate Preferences as Assessed by a Scenario Manipulation Experiment

Many evolutionary psychology studies have addressed the topic of mate preferences, focusing particularly on gender and cultural differences. However, the extent to which situational and environmental variables might affect mate preferences has been comparatively neglected. We tested 288 participants in order to investigate the perceived relative importance of six traits of an ideal partner (wealth, dominance, intelligence, height, kindness, attractiveness) under four different hypothetical scenarios (status quo/nowadays, violence/post-nuclear, poverty/resource exhaustion, prosperity/global well-being). An equal number of participants (36 women, 36 men) was allotted to each scenario; each was asked to allocate 120 points across the six traits according to their perceived value. Overall, intelligence was the trait to which participants assigned most importance, followed by kindness and attractiveness, and then by wealth, dominance and height. Men appraised attractiveness as more valuable than women. Scenario strongly influenced the relative importance attributed to traits, the main finding being that wealth and dominance were more valued in the poverty and post-nuclear scenarios, respectively, compared to the other scenarios. Scenario manipulation generally had similar effects in both sexes, but women appeared particularly prone to trade off other traits for dominance in the violence scenario, and men particularly prone to trade off other traits for wealth in the poverty scenario. Our results are in line with other correlational studies of situational variables and mate preferences, and represent strong evidence of a causal relationship of environmental factors on specific mate preferences, corroborating the notion of an evolved plasticity to current ecological conditions. A control experiment seems to suggest that our scenarios can be considered as realistic descriptions of the intended ecological conditions

Male/Female Is Not Enough: Adding Measures of Masculinity and Femininity to General Population Surveys

Survey research and sociological theory each provide insights into how and why people and groups act, think, and feel. Sociological theories identify what concepts are important for understanding and representing the social world. That is, sociological theories inform what to measure in surveys, and, to a certain extent, how to measure it. Survey research permits sociologists to carefully specify what is to be measured vis a vis sociological theory, setting surveys apart as a social research tool. It is this level of specification of concepts and measures that allow surveys to provide continued value at a time when “big data” proliferate. High quality survey measurement and estimation is necessary for sociologists to evaluate sociological theory among generalizable samples with well-developed questions, leading to further refinement and improvement of the theory and improved understanding of the social world. High quality surveys also provide insights into where sociological theories fail and where they must be adjusted for different subgroups, as well as basic insights into the prevalence of outcomes of interest. Together, sociological theory and survey methods produce insights about society that can inform decision-making and social policy. This mutually reinforcing relationship between sociological theory and survey methods requires sociological theory to evolve from insights obtained using survey methods and survey measurement to evolve with advances in in sociological theory. The measurement of sex and gender in surveys is one area where the development of survey measures has not kept pace with sociological theory and empirical, largely qualitative, findings. Contemporary gender theory sees sex and gender as separate concepts, both of which are important for understanding behaviors and outcomes. Yet, virtually all contemporary surveys measure sex as a binary “male” versus “female” categorization and fail to measure gender, ignoring important heterogeneity in gender identification that may exist within sex categories and any overlap that may occur across categories. Both gender scholars and survey researchers are potentially affected by this shortcoming of modern survey measurement. Gender scholars lose an important tool for assessing gender theories, especially on generalizable samples, risking conclusions that are specific to a small group of individuals rather than the population at large. Survey researchers risk producing theoretically obsolete data, limiting the utility of the data or potentially generating misleading conclusions. Survey data that fail to capture and reflect modern and complex understandings of our social realities also face increased risk of being replaced by “big data” such as administrative and social media data. Survey data that do reflect modern and complex understandings can bring value not available in administrative or other data and are therefore unlikely to be replaced. This paper is part of a growing chorus advocating for updates to how modern surveys measure sex and gender. We argue that the reliance on a single binary measure of sex (male or female) is out of step with current sociological understandings of sex and gender. In response, we propose and test a new theoretically-informed gradational measure of gender identification in a nationally representative mail survey. We evaluate whether respondents answer the gender measure and examine the reliability and predictive validity of the measure. In particular, we examine whether measuring gender gradationally adds explanatory value beyond sex on important social outcomes such as sexuality, childcare, grocery shopping, housework, working for pay, and military service. We also examine whether sex moderates the effect of gender identification in the ways that sociological theory would suggest on these outcomes

Major prospects for exploring canine vector borne diseases and novel intervention methods using 'omic technologies

Canine vector-borne diseases (CVBDs) are of major socioeconomic importance worldwide. Although many studies have provided insights into CVBDs, there has been limited exploration of fundamental molecular aspects of most pathogens, their vectors, pathogen-host relationships and disease and drug resistance using advanced, 'omic technologies. The aim of the present article is to take a prospective view of the impact that next-generation, 'omics technologies could have, with an emphasis on describing the principles of transcriptomic/genomic sequencing as well as bioinformatic technologies and their implications in both fundamental and applied areas of CVBD research. Tackling key biological questions employing these technologies will provide a 'systems biology' context and could lead to radically new intervention and management strategies against CVBDs

Determination of figures of merit for near-infrared and raman spectrometry by net analyte signal analysis for a 4-component solid dosage system

Process analytical technology has elevated the role of sensors in pharmaceutical manufacturing. Often the ideal technology must be selected from many suitable candidates based on limited data. Net analyte signal (NAS) theory provides an effective platform for method characterization based on multivariate figures of merit (FOM). The objective of this work was to demonstrate that these tools can be used to characterize the performance of 2 dissimilar analyzers based on different underlying spectroscopic principles for the analysis of pharmaceutical compacts. A fully balanced, 4-constituent mixture design composed of anhydrous theophylline, lactose monohydrate, microcrystalline cellulose, and starch was generated; it consisted of 29 design points. Six 13-mm tablets were produced from each mixture at 5 compaction levels and were analyzed by near-infrared and Raman spectroscopy. Partial least squares regression and NAS analyses were performed for each component, which allowed for the computation of FOM. Based on the calibration error statistics, both instruments were capable of accurately modeling all constituents. The results of this work indicate that these statistical tools are a suitable platform for comparing dissimilar analyzers and illustrate the complexity of technology selection